Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleCLINICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Correction of Head Movement on PET Studies: Comparison of Methods

Andrew J. Montgomery, Kris Thielemans, Mitul A. Mehta, Federico Turkheimer, Sanida Mustafovic and Paul M. Grasby
Journal of Nuclear Medicine December 2006, 47 (12) 1936-1944;
Andrew J. Montgomery
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kris Thielemans
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mitul A. Mehta
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Federico Turkheimer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sanida Mustafovic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul M. Grasby
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1. 

    Different stages involved in realigning emission data with Polaris-based methods. MTfbf is a 1-stage process, where reconstructed frames (F1 and F2) are moved to position of the transmission scan (TR), using the average frame position derived from Polaris data. MT is a 1-stage process in which lines of response (LORs) are moved to the transmission scan position based on Polaris data. LMCfbf is a 2-stage process: First, LORs within a frame are realigned to average position in the frame using Polaris data; then reconstructed frames are moved to transmission scan position using the average frame position derived from Polaris data. For all methods, only 1 Polaris coordinate is shown for simplicity. Full details of the different methods are given in the text.

  • FIGURE 2. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2. 

    (A) Plots of Polaris translation files (X, left–right; Y, anterior/posterior; Z, dorsal/ventral): x-axis time = min; y-axis from an arbitrary starting point = mm. a and b indicate large movements. (B) Time–activity curve and PET summated images of (from top to bottom): raw PET data, FBF realignment, MTfbf realignment, MT realignment, and LMCfbf realignment. CB = cerebellum; x-axis time = min; y-axis activity = kBq/mL.

  • FIGURE 3. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3. 

    Time–activity curves (left) and RMSEs of motion (right) during scanning for each volunteer. (Left) ▵, DS; □, VS; ♦, cerebellum; y-axis = kBq/mL; x-axis = min. (Right) y-axis = mm; x-axis = min.

  • FIGURE 4. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4. 

    Noise levels (coefficient of variance, COV) in different regions after 5 different analyses: raw data, FBF realignment, and 3 Polaris methods (MTfbf, MT, LMCfbf). ANOVA showed significant effects of region, sample time, and method of analysis, with no interactions (error bars indicate SD; brackets indicate P < 0.05).

  • FIGURE 5. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 5. 

    Mean BPs for VS and DS ROIs (brackets indicate paired t test, P < 0.05).

  • FIGURE 6. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 6. 

    SPM comparisons of BP between first (A) and second (B) sampling periods. All voxels were significant at P < 0.01, uncorrected. Data are sagittal (top rows) and axial (bottom rows) glass brain views. Arrowheads indicate peak voxels in significant clusters.

  • FIGURE 7. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 7. 

    Measured BP in VS and DS ROI as ROI is moved a voxel at a time in the z-axis. Large changes in BP result from small changes in ROI position, demonstrating the susceptibility of measurements to movement.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Stability of Regional Activity Measured by Percentage Change in Activity per Hour

    MethodRegionMean ± SD
    RawVS−3.3 ± 15.9
    DS−3.8 ± 10.1
    CB−3.7 ± 12.5
    FBFVS−3.3 ± 15.9
    DS−3.2 ± 9.7
    CB0.0 ± 8.6
    MTfbfVS1.1 ± 10.4
    DS1.0 ± 8.4
    CB1.5 ± 6.6
    MTVS−1.2 ± 14.7
    DS−1.2 ± 7.3
    CB1.1 ± 11.2
    LMCfbfVS*†1.5 ± 12.9
    DS1.1 ± 9.0
    CB1.2 ± 8.0
    • ↵* P = 0.08 vs. raw data.

    • ↵† P < 0.05 compared with FBF.

    • CB = cerebellum.

    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    BPs in VS and DS After 5 Methods of Analysis

    VSDS
    Method38−5358−10038−5358−100
    Raw1.92 ± 0.711.80 ± 0.242.33 ± 0.812.27 ± 0.23
    FBF1.92 ± 0.681.88 ± 0.202.28 ± 0.792.33 ± 0.17
    MTfbf1.99 ± 0.692.03 ± 0.132.33 ± 0.802.39 ± 0.13
    MT1.86 ± 0.241.85 ± 0.132.22 ± 0.212.22 ± 0.20
    LMCfbf1.94 ± 0.671.94 ± 0.102.27 ± 0.782.30 ± 0.14
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Measures of Test–Retest Reliability for 5 Methods of Data Analysis

    VSDS
    MethodChangeVariabilityICCChangeVariabilityICC
    Raw−4.5 ± 14.513.5 ± 5.10.57−2.2 ± 4.64.2 ± 2.40.89
    FBF−1.1 ± 9.17.3 ± 4.8*0.752.6 ± 5.03.6 ± 4.20.86
    MTfbf2.6 ± 5.95.1 ± 3.6*0.792.9 ± 4.63.9 ± 3.80.79
    MT−0.2 ± 7.05.0 ± 4.5*†0.810.8 ± 3.62.8 ± 2.20.95
    LMCfbf0.6 ± 6.14.9 ± 3.3*0.751.2 ± 3.32.7 ± 2.10.90
    • ↵* Significantly different compared with raw data.

    • ↵† Trend difference compared with FBF.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 47 (12)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 47, Issue 12
December 2006
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Correction of Head Movement on PET Studies: Comparison of Methods
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Correction of Head Movement on PET Studies: Comparison of Methods
Andrew J. Montgomery, Kris Thielemans, Mitul A. Mehta, Federico Turkheimer, Sanida Mustafovic, Paul M. Grasby
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Dec 2006, 47 (12) 1936-1944;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Correction of Head Movement on PET Studies: Comparison of Methods
Andrew J. Montgomery, Kris Thielemans, Mitul A. Mehta, Federico Turkheimer, Sanida Mustafovic, Paul M. Grasby
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Dec 2006, 47 (12) 1936-1944;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Validation and Evaluation of a Vendor-Provided Head Motion Correction Algorithm on the uMI Panorama PET/CT System
  • Dynamic 11C-PiB PET Shows Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow Alterations in Alzheimer Disease and Multiple Sclerosis
  • Dynamic 11C-PiB PET shows cerebrospinal fluid flow alterations in Alzheimers disease and multiple sclerosis
  • Links between central CB1-receptor availability and peripheral endocannabinoids in patients with first episode psychosis
  • An Efficient Approach to Perform MR-Assisted PET Data Optimization in Simultaneous PET/MR Neuroimaging Studies
  • Evaluation of Frame-Based and Event-by-Event Motion-Correction Methods for Awake Monkey Brain PET Imaging
  • Serotonergic loss in motor circuitries correlates with severity of action-postural tremor in PD
  • MRI-Based Nonrigid Motion Correction in Simultaneous PET/MRI
  • Serotonin Neuron Loss and Nonmotor Symptoms Continue in Parkinson's Patients Treated with Dopamine Grafts
  • Methods for Motion Correction Evaluation Using 18F-FDG Human Brain Scans on a High-Resolution PET Scanner
  • Effect of Patient Arm Motion in Whole-Body PET/CT
  • Depressive symptoms in PD correlate with higher 5-HTT binding in raphe and limbic structures
  • Serotonergic Neurons Mediate Dyskinesia Side Effects in Parkinson's Patients with Neural Transplants
  • Increased striatal dopamine (D2/D3) receptor availability and delusions in Alzheimer disease
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Cardiac Presynaptic Sympathetic Nervous Function Evaluated by Cardiac PET in Patients with Chronotropic Incompetence Without Heart Failure
  • Validation and Evaluation of a Vendor-Provided Head Motion Correction Algorithm on the uMI Panorama PET/CT System
  • An Investigation of Lesion Detection Accuracy for Artificial Intelligence–Based Denoising of Low-Dose 64Cu-DOTATATE PET Imaging in Patients with Neuroendocrine Neoplasms
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire